Mobility station as a hub

Building design
Picture of the Münchner Freiheit stop at night.

The first mobility station in Munich was built at Münchner Freiheit in 2015. credits: Richard Huber, CC BY-SA 3.0, via Wikimedia Commons

A mobility station links various mobility services at one location. Read more about this here.

A mobility station links various mobility services at one location. Read more about this here.

“Take your own bike to the B+R station, from there take the regional train to the city center, take the subway to your workplace and from there take a rental bike for the last mile – for your lunch break, take a rental scooter if the weather is good or a bus if it’s raining,” is how MVV describes its vision for the urban mobility of the future. The aim is to ensure comprehensive connections and uncomplicated use of different means of transport through so-called mobility stations.

These serve as hubs and service points for urban mobility. They bring together various mobility services at one location and make it easy to switch between the individual services. The mobility stations primarily offer environmentally friendly means of transportation in order to promote a reduction in private car use. In addition to shared cars and rental bikes, they offer, for example, weather-protected bike parking and charging infrastructure for private electric vehicles and are linked to public transport stops. Depending on demand and design approach, they can also be supplemented with other services. For example, some mobility stations already offer storage facilities such as lockers, parcel stations or changing rooms for changing clothes. Exactly what a station looks like therefore varies from municipality to municipality.

In Germany, the first mobility station was opened in Bremen back in 2003. The concept then gradually spread to other cities. Major cities such as Hamburg, Leipzig and Munich, as well as smaller cities such as Offenburg, have established the mobile contact points. In addition to locations at major public transport hubs, they are also increasingly found in residential areas. This proximity is essential for the success of the stations. A survey conducted by Verkehrsclub Deutschland e.V. (VCD) back in 2016 revealed that people were particularly keen to have a short route to the station from their home. 68% of those surveyed at stated this. Only a large number of stations in the urban area, which also provide access to residential areas, can therefore guarantee everyday use. A further 50 percent were also in favor of on-site parking spaces for cars and 42 percent called for secure parking spaces for bicycles.

Good visibility is also considered essential. Both analog in the street and on digital platforms. Furthermore, the provision of information pillars that inform users about the available mobility options.

In Munich, MVV also relies on an obvious corporate identity through uniform logos. The MP logo unites mobility points throughout the MVV area. Pictograms show which services can be found on site in detail. The mobility station at Münchner Freiheit was a pilot project in Munich. It was launched in 2015 as a joint project between LHM and SWM/MVG. Since then, it has not only brought together subway, bus, streetcar and cab stops, but also bike & ride, park & ride, car sharing and MVG bike services. Münchner Freiheit was followed by other mobility stations in the city – but development has been slow so far. At the beginning of the year, there were only nine such stations in total.

A new initiative aims to change this. In June, a new station was opened in Knöbelstraße in Lehel under the title “Mobility Point”. The principle is no different from the existing stations, but under the new name, the city wants to launch a construction program for 200 such mobility points by 2026. In this way, the mobility department wants to guarantee a comprehensive connection for all Munich residents within a five-minute walk of their own home. The project will then expand even further out of the urban area in the future. From 2024, more than 60 additional mobility points with integrated services from the Munich Transport Association (MVV) will initially be created in ten municipalities in the district of Fürstenfeldbruck. The so-called last mile could actually be better connected thanks to the initiative. And in the best-case scenario, even more people will switch from private cars to environmentally friendly alternatives in the future.

You can find more thoughts on the last mile and mobility in rural areas here.

YOU MAY ALSO LIKE

Women’s power in architecture

Building design
Women in architecture: Grete Schütte-Lihotzky

Grete Schütte-Lihotzky

Around 1900, a group of women in Germany first challenged the social view of the time that the work of an architect was incompatible with femininity. They demanded the right to a university education and by 1909 had succeeded in having all technical universities in Germany admit women to study. Nevertheless, it remained difficult to […]

Around 1900, a group of women in Germany first challenged the social view of the time that the work of an architect was incompatible with femininity. They demanded the right to a university education and by 1909 had succeeded in having all technical universities in Germany admit women to study. Nevertheless, it remained difficult for women to find a job in architecture. Widespread prejudices, such as that women could not handle finances and were unable to supervise workers on a construction site, meant that female architects resorted to strategies to either adapt to or renegotiate social gender expectations. This situation remained dominant throughout the 20th century and to some extent still is today.

It is hardly surprising that the first female architects mainly realized projects in which they themselves or someone from their family was the client. Therese Mogger acquired plots of land in the Gerresheim district of Düsseldorf around 1911, for which she then designed apartment buildings. Elisabeth von Knobelsdorff and Princess Victoria von Bentheim- Steinfurt, both early graduates of the TH Berlin, designed apartments and social facilities that were built on their family’s estates. In the 1920s, it was common for female architects to collaborate with a male partner in order to work on important public projects: A visitor to the Weissenhof Estate in Stuttgart in 1927 would have encountered Lilly Reich and Mies van der Rohe, Marlene Moeschke-Poelzig and Hans Poelzig or Else Oppler-Legband and Peter Behrens. As a rule, these women had studied arts and crafts or fine arts. Their design contributions mainly concerned furniture and interior decoration – areas that were considered less prestigious. Women who had studied also had the opportunity to aspire to a position in the civil service. However, they had to remain unmarried in order not to lose their job. In the 1920s, the Austrian Margarete Lihotzky was employed by Ernst May at the Frankfurt Building Department. When she married her professional colleague Wilhelm Schütte, she had to give up her employment and from then on could only work as a freelancer. Her husband was not subject to such restrictions. The period of German National Socialism brought an abrupt end to the careers of a number of promising Jewish women architects. Among them were the Bauhaus students Friedl Dicker and Zsuzsa Bánki as well as Ilse Bloch (née Cats), who had graduated from the TH Berlin. All three women were murdered in Auschwitz. After the Second World War, women in Germany, regardless of whether they worked in the GDR or the FRG, had greater opportunities if they concentrated on construction projects with a social focus, such as housing construction, facilities for children and young people and interior design. After returning from exile in America, Karola Bloch, for example, designed standard typologies for day-care centers for the Deutsche Bauakademie in the 1950s.

Strategies

Based on the biographies of female architects, strategies for success can be identified that go beyond individual personal circumstances and constellations. As a rule, female architects are very mobile and are prepared to emigrate or travel long distances in order to improve their career opportunities. Gertrud Schille not only traveled to Wolfsburg in western Germany for her planetariums, but also to Baghdad and Tripoli in Libya. Furthermore, successful female architects often benefit from the material and intellectual support of colleagues in the same profession and also offer such support themselves. Marie Frommer gave up a flourishing office in Berlin in 1936 and went into exile in New York. Contacts with professional associations of and for women there helped her to re-establish herself. As a result, she was soon able to open an office specializing in the interior design of apartments and stores – a line of business in which women were rare as owners, but nevertheless more readily accepted than elsewhere. Today, although half of all architecture students in Europe are female, women still lag behind men in terms of professional success. Structurally, the strategies of female architects are therefore still similar, they have merely adapted to today’s circumstances in their concrete forms. Even if this is rarely talked about: Women who have additional material resources at their disposal, be it for taking out a loan when setting up an office or for financing childcare, have significantly higher chances of being successful despite social disadvantage and the double burden of work and family.

Office partnerships

Partnerships with men continue to provide female architects with a framework that is conducive to their professional development – especially as the division of responsibilities and traditional gender boundaries are no longer as clearly marked as they were in the past. Well-known examples include Sauerbruch Hutton, Barkow Leibinger, Grüntuch-Ernst, and Bolles + Wilson in Germany; Helen & Hard in Norway; Lacaton & Vassal in France</a>; O’Donnell + Tuomey in Ireland or Bos and van Berkel from UN Studio in the Netherlands. Women are also among the partners in very large offices – for example the Dutch architect Nathalie de Vries from MVRDV or the Belgian Christine Conix from CONIX RDBM. Women also have leading roles in alternative office forms, such as Paloma Strelitz from the London planning collective Assemble. Last but not least, there are architecture firms – including Grafton Architects (Yvonne Farrell, Shelley McNamara) in Dublin, vPPR (Tatiana von Preussen, Catherine Lease, Jessica Reynolds) in London and Schultz Sievers (Cathrin Schultz, Kathrin Sievers) in Bremen – that are run exclusively by women. Even though women now work as architects in very different fields, an above-average number of them still work on projects in which social commitment is the main focus. Susanne Hofmann with her company Baupiloten and Dorte Mandrup in Copenhagen have made a name for themselves with innovative buildings for children and young people. The willingness to be mobile and adapt to different working contexts continues to be a way for women to secure the opportunity to work independently as designers.

Competitions

The open competition remains the most important way for female architects to secure major public commissions. In 1983, Zaha Hadid caused an international sensation when she submitted a visionary design for the competition for the leisure and recreation park “The Peak Leisure Club” in Hong Kong. In Germany, Gesine Weinmiller realized the new building for the Federal Labour Court in Erfurt in 1999, Ursula Wilms from Heinle, Wischer und Partner the building for the Topography of Terror in Berlin (2010) and Gabriele Glöckner the extension to the German National Library in Leipzig (2011). In all cases, the architects won the respective competition. The first two decades of the 21st century are a time of transition for women in architecture. They are still a long way from full equality with their male colleagues, but there have been significant improvements in terms of the number of female architects employed and the variety of role models available to women in the profession. It will be the task of the many young women studying architecture today and pushing into the relevant professions to develop new strategies that will secure them a place in the world of architecture – strategies, it is to be hoped, that no longer focus on fighting against and circumventing outdated gender concepts, but that allow them to fully develop their creative potential without being hindered by discrimination.

This article appeared in our Baumeisterinnen issue in August 2017. Curious about more exciting women in architecture? Click here for the magazine.

TEFAF has once again awarded 50,000 euros to two selected restoration projects in 2017. TEFAF (The European Fine Art Foundation) will take place in Maastricht from March 10 to 19, 2017. Each year, the TEFAF Museum Restoration Fund donates up to 50,000 euros to museums pursuing a current conservation or restoration project. An independent […]

TEFAF has once again awarded 50,000 euros to two selected restoration projects in 2017.

TEFAF (The European Fine Art Foundation) will take place in Maastricht from March 10 to 19, 2017. Each year, the TEFAF Museum Restoration Fund donates up to 50,000 euros to museums pursuing a current conservation or restoration project. An independent committee of international experts decides on the applications submitted. The support is intended both to promote the restoration of special works of art and to communicate the significance and importance of conservation.

This year, the prize money went to the Musée Rodin in Paris and to the Detroit Institute of Arts, USA. The financial injection will enable the restoration and reconstruction of a work by Auguste Rodin (1840-1917) entitled “Absolution”. It will also enable the conservation of “Judith with the Head of Holofernes” by Titian (1488-1576), a work that has been on display in the exhibition almost continuously since its purchase.

The 25th anniversary of the TEFAF in 2012 was the occasion to establish the restoration fund for the first time. An overview of the restoration projects supported by TEFAF to date:

2016

Reconstruction of the Tower of Nanjing, de Robien Collection at the Musée des Beaux-Arts in Rennes, France;
Restoration of “Girl in White” by James McNeil Whistler, Singer Memorial Foundation in Laren, Netherlands

2015

Restoration of works by Francisco de Zurbarán, Museum Kunstpalast in Düsseldorf, Wadsworth Atheneum Museum of Art in Connecticut

2014

Restoration of three coffin groups and a sarcophagus from the 21st dynasty discovered in 1891, Rijksmuseum van Oudheden in Leiden, Netherlands;
Restoration of the painting “Miss Nelly O’Brien” by Joshua Reynolds, Wallace Collection in London

2013

Restoration of the portraits of William and Elizabeth James by William Hogarth, Worcester Art Museum in Massachusetts, USA;
Restoration of two chandeliers combining elements of classical sculpture and carving by Giovanni Battista Piranesi, Ashmolean Museum, Oxford

2012

Restoration of a Venice painting by Canaletto, Denver Art Museum, USA;
Conservation of the ten bronze statuettes from the 15th century tomb of Isabella of Bourbon, Rijksmuseum, Amsterdam